It seems that you're using an outdated browser. Some things may not work as they should (or don't work at all).
We suggest you upgrade newer and better browser like: Chrome, Firefox, Internet Explorer or Opera

×
Community
General discussionGhostbusters trailer(336 posts)(336 posts)
(336 posts)
Pages:
1
5
10
15
16
17
18
19
20
23
This is my favourite topic
Posted March 08, 2016
avatar
Valka808: Did anyone notice how the trailer says "30 years ago, 4 scientists..." etc., One of the original 4 was not a scientist. So sad that they did not even pay any attention to original story when writing any of this crap :(
avatar
tinyE: Good ears. Nice pick up. Of course I never bought Bill Murry as a scientist anyway but that's beside the point. :P
Well parapsychology is bullshit anyway.
avatar
Valka808: Did anyone notice how the trailer says "30 years ago, 4 scientists..." etc., One of the original 4 was not a scientist. So sad that they did not even pay any attention to original story when writing any of this crap :(
That one line put about 4 nails in the coffin alone.
Post edited March 08, 2016 by ScotchMonkey
Posted March 08, 2016
avatar
tinyE: Good ears. Nice pick up. Of course I never bought Bill Murry as a scientist anyway but that's beside the point. :P
avatar
ScotchMonkey: Well parapsychology is bullshit anyway.
Not if it can get you into a girl's pants...
Posted March 08, 2016
avatar
ScotchMonkey: Well parapsychology is bullshit anyway.
avatar
Randalator: Not if it can get you into a girl's pants...
Yeah bitches love parapsychology.
Posted March 08, 2016
avatar
tinyE: Good ears. Nice pick up. Of course I never bought Bill Murry as a scientist anyway but that's beside the point. :P
avatar
ScotchMonkey: Well parapsychology is bullshit anyway.
avatar
Valka808: Did anyone notice how the trailer says "30 years ago, 4 scientists..." etc., One of the original 4 was not a scientist. So sad that they did not even pay any attention to original story when writing any of this crap :(
avatar
ScotchMonkey: That one line put about 4 nails in the coffin alone.
<sarcasm>Oh no how horrible the trailer generalized slightly and said 4 scientists instead of 3 scientists and the other guy. The movie is doomed to be the worst of all time. There's absolutely no way it can recover from such a tiny and insignificant flaw. </sarcasm>

Seriously I don't know if the movie will be good bad or in between but if such a tiny thing ruins it for you then you might as well not even watch because your mind is clearly determined to find any reason to hate it.
Posted March 08, 2016
avatar
ScotchMonkey: Well parapsychology is bullshit anyway.

That one line put about 4 nails in the coffin alone.
avatar
RogueXanter: <sarcasm>Oh no how horrible the trailer generalized slightly and said 4 scientists instead of 3 scientists and the other guy. The movie is doomed to be the worst of all time. There's absolutely no way it can recover from such a tiny and insignificant flaw. </sarcasm>

Seriously I don't know if the movie will be good bad or in between but if such a tiny thing ruins it for you then you might as well not even watch because your mind is clearly determined to find any reason to hate it.
<sarcasm> Yeah I guess details don't matter when your budget is 150 million. I mean its not like any of that money went to the script right? Or maybe it did, those tired old comedic tropes still go for a pretty penny I hear. They are gems though I mean just look at the trailer! Its got the smart one and the fat one and the loud dumb one, I mean who wouldn't find that funny? By god it was a knee slapper well worth the GDP of a small African nation.
Post edited March 08, 2016 by ScotchMonkey
Posted March 08, 2016
avatar
RogueXanter: <sarcasm>Oh no how horrible the trailer generalized slightly and said 4 scientists instead of 3 scientists and the other guy. The movie is doomed to be the worst of all time. There's absolutely no way it can recover from such a tiny and insignificant flaw. </sarcasm>

Seriously I don't know if the movie will be good bad or in between but if such a tiny thing ruins it for you then you might as well not even watch because your mind is clearly determined to find any reason to hate it.
avatar
ScotchMonkey: <sarcasm> Yeah I guess details don't matter when your budget is 150 million. I mean its not like any of that money went to the script right? Or maybe it did, those tired old comedic tropes still go for a pretty penny I hear. They are gems though I mean just look at the trailer! Its got the smart one and the fat one and the loud dumb one, I mean who wouldn't find that funny? By god it was a knee slapper well worth the GDP of a small African nation.
<even more sarcasm> Yes, because nothing says 'evil patriarchy' like a 150 million dollar budget.

Hey, I'll gladly don a wig and preach about women's rights to have hairy armpits for 150 million dollars. You can't buy that kind of PR. Well, no... I guess you can. The human race, getting derped one DERP at a time.
Posted March 08, 2016
avatar
ScotchMonkey: <sarcasm> Yeah I guess details don't matter when your budget is 150 million. I mean its not like any of that money went to the script right? Or maybe it did, those tired old comedic tropes still go for a pretty penny I hear. They are gems though I mean just look at the trailer! Its got the smart one and the fat one and the loud dumb one, I mean who wouldn't find that funny? By god it was a knee slapper well worth the GDP of a small African nation.
avatar
Emob78: <even more sarcasm> Yes, because nothing says 'evil patriarchy' like a 150 million dollar budget.

Hey, I'll gladly don a wig and preach about women's rights to have hairy armpits for 150 million dollars. You can't buy that kind of PR. Well, no... I guess you can. The human race, getting derped one DERP at a time.
All that money and for what?

Some perspective

Ghostbusters budget adjusted for inflation comes to around 70 million

and

Adjusted for inflation the first Alien film was made for around 28 million.
Posted March 08, 2016
avatar
RogueXanter: <sarcasm>Oh no how horrible the trailer generalized slightly and said 4 scientists instead of 3 scientists and the other guy. The movie is doomed to be the worst of all time. There's absolutely no way it can recover from such a tiny and insignificant flaw. </sarcasm>

Seriously I don't know if the movie will be good bad or in between but if such a tiny thing ruins it for you then you might as well not even watch because your mind is clearly determined to find any reason to hate it.
avatar
ScotchMonkey: <sarcasm> Yeah I guess details don't matter when your budget is 150 million. I mean its not like any of that money went to the script right? Or maybe it did, those tired old comedic tropes still go for a pretty penny I hear. They are gems though I mean just look at the trailer! Its got the smart one and the fat one and the loud dumb one, I mean who wouldn't find that funny? By god it was a knee slapper well worth the GDP of a small African nation.
And how did the topic shift from you blowing one line in the trailer out of proportion to the trailer as a whole?
Seriously have you ever considered that the reason the character in the trailer said 4 scientists is that was how she was told the story in setting? Or maybe the odd man out became a scientist after the movies and she didn't know he wasn't one when he helped save the city? There are lots of reasons that a character in the setting might get the detail about the number of scientists involved wrong.
Posted March 08, 2016
avatar
ScotchMonkey: <sarcasm> Yeah I guess details don't matter when your budget is 150 million. I mean its not like any of that money went to the script right? Or maybe it did, those tired old comedic tropes still go for a pretty penny I hear. They are gems though I mean just look at the trailer! Its got the smart one and the fat one and the loud dumb one, I mean who wouldn't find that funny? By god it was a knee slapper well worth the GDP of a small African nation.
avatar
RogueXanter: Words words words words words words words
Reaching to defend this piece of shit movie is a waste of anyones time.
Posted March 08, 2016
avatar
darthspudius: Why the obnoxious comment btw?
avatar
ValamirCleaver: It wasn't intended as an obnoxious comment. I was trying to make obvious, to whom ever might not know, that the Filmation Ghostbusters pre-dated the Columbia movie by almost a decade. In addition to that to "add insult to injury"; after agreeing to a licensing agreement for rights to the title & general premise, which included 1% of the profit from the pictures, Columbia used "creative accounting" to deny Filmation any addition income.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ghostbusters_%281986_TV_series%29#Controversy
https://web.archive.org/web/20080423051330/http://www.the-trades.com/article.php?id=5561
https://web.archive.org/web/20071013083248/http://www.the-trades.com/article.php?id=5450
https://web.archive.org/web/20071012183110/http://www.the-trades.com/article.php?id=5260

avatar
hedwards: They were style over substance. They'd wallpaper over the complete lack of substance with a ton of style. Mr. Magoo was probably the best cartoon they did and that was pretty horrible.
avatar
ValamirCleaver: I agree with that sentiment; hence my response, "UPA... now you just reminded me of those Mr. Magoo and Dick Tracy cartoons." Out of curiosity I found some of the early Mr. Magoo shorts, which weren't as bad as the later output where it seems to me that UPA were using cost-cutting shortcuts. Hence my perception in the decline in quality of UPA's later output.
Alright, sorry mate. :D
Posted March 08, 2016
avatar
RogueXanter: Words words words words words words words
avatar
ScotchMonkey: Reaching to defend this piece of shit movie is a waste of anyones time.
Unless you've seen the movie, which I highly doubt, there is no way for you to know if it is a piece of shit movie or not.
Posted March 08, 2016
avatar
darthspudius: Alright, sorry mate. :D
Don't worry about it... ;)
Posted March 08, 2016
avatar
Valka808: Did anyone notice how the trailer says "30 years ago, 4 scientists..." etc., One of the original 4 was not a scientist. So sad that they did not even pay any attention to original story when writing any of this crap :(
avatar
tinyE: Good ears. Nice pick up. Of course I never bought Bill Murry as a scientist anyway but that's beside the point. :P
Well, at least it didn't turn out the original Ghostbusters came from Zeist.
Posted March 08, 2016
avatar
Valka808: Did anyone notice how the trailer says "30 years ago, 4 scientists..." etc., One of the original 4 was not a scientist. So sad that they did not even pay any attention to original story when writing any of this crap :(
avatar
tinyE: Good ears. Nice pick up. Of course I never bought Bill Murry as a scientist anyway but that's beside the point. :P
No he was a scientist, it was just that his theories were the worst kind of popular tripe, his methods were sloppy, and his conclusions were highly questionable. He was a poor scientist!
Posted March 08, 2016
It looks just like the original Ghostbusters honestly. A goofy, silly comedy movie.

Comedy has changed though. In the 80's, comedy was all about wit and sarcasm. That's why Bill Murray and Dan Aykroyd were so good in the film. They are both very sarcastic and witty performers and writers.

Modern comedy is much more about sight gags and slapstick. Look at films like The Hangover, Scott Pilgrim, Trainwreck, anything by Pixar, etc, for evidence of that. This trailer has shows that this movie has that type of humor in abundance.

I PREFER the witty, sarcastic comedy to the physical comedy, but then again, this movie isn't being made for me. It's being made for a new generation who may not prefer that comedy style. So we'll see where it goes

But just from the trailer I can't predict if it will be good or bad. It's just different and different can go either way
Pages:
1
5
10
15
16
17
18
19
20
23
This is my favourite topic
Community
General discussionGhostbusters trailer(336 posts)(336 posts)
(336 posts)